No surprise there - the Alternative Vote (AV) electoral system is even harder for parties smaller than the Liberal 'Democrats' to win under than is the Single Transferable Vote (STV).
The Liberal 'Democrats' picked STV as their preferred voting system to elect MPs before UKIP beat them in the last two EU Elections held under the list system of proportional representation voting. Now some of the Liberal 'Democrat' party membership might accept AV because they think it would be harder for anti-EU UKIP to gain seats under than STV. The last thing that the Liberal 'Democrats' want is a proportional representation voting system which would lead to UKIP winning more seats than them in the House of Commons.
Abort Abortion.
As you quote in your posting number nine to this thread - the Alternative Vote electoral system is not proportional.
After the 2005 General Election it emerged that the had that election been held with the Alternative Vote electoral system the Labour Party - with a 36% vote share - would have had an even bigger majority in the House of Commons than they actually got with the First-Past-The-Post voting system used for electing MPs.
Abort Abortion.
Eh? UKIP have consistently shown themselves to do well only in Euro elections.
To answer the OP. None existant, although it was a great marketing scam that fooled a LOT of people. Just like the Tory 'fair petrol tax' promise.
'Orrible nasty farchisst
I can see how that might work for you and David Cameron, though you are going to need both luck and judgment.Part of the problem is the preposterous enthusiasm with which the Lib Dems greet anything that they have had a say in.
Nope, sorry, the EU elections use a kind of Party List system, the Libdems want the SINGLE TRANSFERABLE VOTE (STV). STV is used in the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland and for local elections in Scotland. It is a preferential system like AV but unlike AV it's proportional.
Last edited by Citizen67; 27-04-2011 at 09:33 AM.
People should be bred like Horses.
Bookmarks